Article V ping!
It reads like something George Orwell would have written....
I don’t think any honest “expert” can say for sure that a ConCon won’t devolve into something disastrous. Once one is called, how could it possibly be limited in scope? If a proponent can provably guarantee to all the skeptics that there’s absolutely, positively no way that such a disaster can happen, great! Otherwise it’s simply not worth the risk. Don’t forget that the American people are so addled that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by a wide margin.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
We have lost the basic fundamental idea behind the constitution. Not separation of powers alone as is taught today even in conservative circles, but that idea is the genuine representation of the people in the house of representatives. Our laws should be voted on by 4,000 representatives not 435!
As I read all of Publius Huldah’s statements I recognize a voice of a sensationalist stirring up disinformation and trouble. I’ve only been studying an Article V convention for 4 weeks now and her false statements are blatant!
One has only to read Article V to first realize that it discusses amendments ONLY to the Constitution. Where she gets this idea of creating a new constitution is her vindictive point of troublemaking.
We already have 26 amendments to the Constitution. Congress gets its own power to amend the Constitution from Article V. Why would the ratification of those amendments be any different from amendments proposed by the states? (Rhetorical) It is sad to me that many seem to have been mislead into a political cult-like environment by this individual.
Please tell me this is sarcasm.